Letter: Solar energy may not be all it claims to be

Published: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 at 08:29 PM.

Yes, our citizenry should be concerned about a “solar farm” deal being ramrodded by County Commissioners and they should be concerned on more than one level.

According to a story appearing recently in the Wall Street Journal, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory stated that solar (electric power production) is 67 percent more expensive than wind (but with no pureed eagles, fortunately) and twice as expensive as natural gas. One utility energy planner reported that solar costs about 80 cents per kilowatt hour (kwh) compared to the national average of about 10 cents per kwh.

Solar energy is one of the worst ways to reduce carbon emissions. An analysis by McKinsey and Company found that nuclear, wind and even coal with carbon capture are more effective. Bloomberg New Energy Finance also found the same result, ranking solar panels 28th out of thirty-three (33) carbon-reduction options.

We might ask, then, why is solar so popular? Massive taxpayer subsidies hide the actual cost. Most renewables receive a subsidy of roughly one (1) cent per kwh. Solar energy receives about 96 cents per kwh. We pay solar’s inflated cost in the form of taxes rather than as electric rates. Duke, et al, will take credit for “investing in renewable energy” but will, of course, stick customers with the bill.

England’s largest solar farm (Hawton, Nottinghamshire), also 5MW, has 21,600 panels but only occupies 36 acres, not quite half of the 80 acres being proposed for the Gaston County facility.

What discussions have been had about the considerable water usage of a power generating facility of this size? With the Waste Management facility nearby, what about particulates entrained in the atmosphere covering the solar panels and reducing their efficiency?

Also, I personally would be suspicious of Calor Energy as a major stakeholder, as they are in the shell-game business of “renewable energy credits.” Thankfully, thus far our nation has avoided being duped into participating in the “carbon credit” scam, at least institutionally. It would seem there are many questions that need to be asked of our commissioners and soon.

Yes, our citizenry should be concerned about a “solar farm” deal being ramrodded by County Commissioners and they should be concerned on more than one level.

According to a story appearing recently in the Wall Street Journal, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory stated that solar (electric power production) is 67 percent more expensive than wind (but with no pureed eagles, fortunately) and twice as expensive as natural gas. One utility energy planner reported that solar costs about 80 cents per kilowatt hour (kwh) compared to the national average of about 10 cents per kwh.

Solar energy is one of the worst ways to reduce carbon emissions. An analysis by McKinsey and Company found that nuclear, wind and even coal with carbon capture are more effective. Bloomberg New Energy Finance also found the same result, ranking solar panels 28th out of thirty-three (33) carbon-reduction options.

We might ask, then, why is solar so popular? Massive taxpayer subsidies hide the actual cost. Most renewables receive a subsidy of roughly one (1) cent per kwh. Solar energy receives about 96 cents per kwh. We pay solar’s inflated cost in the form of taxes rather than as electric rates. Duke, et al, will take credit for “investing in renewable energy” but will, of course, stick customers with the bill.

England’s largest solar farm (Hawton, Nottinghamshire), also 5MW, has 21,600 panels but only occupies 36 acres, not quite half of the 80 acres being proposed for the Gaston County facility.

What discussions have been had about the considerable water usage of a power generating facility of this size? With the Waste Management facility nearby, what about particulates entrained in the atmosphere covering the solar panels and reducing their efficiency?

Also, I personally would be suspicious of Calor Energy as a major stakeholder, as they are in the shell-game business of “renewable energy credits.” Thankfully, thus far our nation has avoided being duped into participating in the “carbon credit” scam, at least institutionally. It would seem there are many questions that need to be asked of our commissioners and soon.